Community Reputation

About randombadger

Profile Information

Brilliant trap, and you are right, it has potential for development. But I think the reason it ended manufacture was it was too well made and too complex compared to many other traps, especially the Fenns, making it expensive. The closest current production trap in terms of concept is the Kania, and it isn't cheap either and has that annoying handle sticking out the side of it. The Fuller was a superb design IMO, perhaps in this new trapping climate there may be a place for a newly manufactured Fuller.

You may be right about the centre baffle and grey squirrel, although perhaps that could be modified. If the aim of the baffle is just to slow down a fast moving stoat so that the strike bar hits it then slowing a grey squirrely down to a complete halt might be fine as its head will be right in the strike zone. And it probably doesn't matter if the trap is used in a single entrance box instead of a run-through tunnel.
I'd agree that the Fenns are more versatile and reasonably priced, however it is also often less efficient at ensuring a quick clean kill, particularly when used sloppily by the inexperienced or disinterested. That isn't to say it can't get a clean kill but I think the point of this trap is to try and ensure that every kill is clean and quick (or as close to that as the legislation is about to demand) and to make it fool proof rather than to rely on the supposed skill (or lack of) that the trapper possesses.
The Tully appears to have passed those tests, it seems unlikely to allow more animals to be caught, just to do so more 'humanely', but until people start using them in the field who really knows if it will do the business

The biggest difference is that as demonstrated in the video this trap can be set easily while held in your hand, a Doc 150 needs to be screwed down to something solid in order to set it effectively. This trap is also designed to share key dimensions with the Fenn trap (same width and height as he says in the vid), That means it should fit into many existing tunnels as most should be longer than this trap anyway. Thus this trap can in theory be used in many of the same situations where people have their Fenns right now as a 'drop in' replacement. The DOC currently has to be used in a box that matches the DOC specifications and has to be attached to it, so it is a much less practical option on both of those scores.
Soon enough the Fenns won't be legal for stoats so replacements will be needed, we should be grateful this guy has gone to the effort to at least try and develop an alternative option, even if it might be imperfect it does seem to offer something different to the DOCs.
Only stoat is covered in these new trap changes coming so there's not much reason for it not to be available for rats, weasels and Squirrels and maybe other things.

The rounded Fenn trap would be the 'Fenn Rabbit trap Mk1'. pretty much the same design as the mkiv and mkvi but with the cross bar forming a semicircle rather than a straight bar. I think they stopped making them because the Mkvi did the same job. Not sure what the benefit of the curved bar was thought to be for rabbits. Maybe so it didn't catch on the tunnel sides so bad, but it think it was slightly taller so that wouldn't add up.

That seems a bit contradictory, maybe we should just clarify the exact position:
Here's a direct quote from section 1(3) of the badgers Act 1992: "A person is guilty of an offence if, except as permitted by or under this Act, he has in his possession or under his control any dead badger or any part of, or anything derived from, a dead badger."
The caveat is the next section 1(4):
"A person is not guilty of an offence under subsection (3) above if he shows that—
.
(a)
the badger had not been killed, or had been killed otherwise than in contravention of the provisions of this Act or of the M1Badgers Act 1973; or
.
(
the badger or other thing in his possession or control had been sold (whether to him or any other person) and, at the time of the purchase, the purchaser had had no reason to believe that the badger had been killed in contravention of any of those provisions.
The Question by the OP is about ensuring he can show he is complying with 1(4)a so he doesn't get prosecuted by some overzealous person under the very real (i.e. it exists) section 1(3)!"
Seems clear, but vague at the same time. i.e. clear that you can possess if you can show that you came about it lawfully, but vague as to how exactly you do that.

I've scoured the internet but can't find any decent images of a Fenn Mk2, I'm interested in how it's different to the MK3. I know it's a bit lighter but not sure if there are any minor differences in shape. Does anyone know where some comparative photos can be found?

"Depends what time in the morning it's tapping the window...anytime before 7:30 is a good reason"
Based on what?
There isn't a general licence that covers that particular problem, Some people might like to make out it's a 'health' issue, but good luck with that should some busybody report you to an unsympathetic PC.....
If the OP want's to make sure he isn't inadvertently breaking any law he should apply to Natural England for a licence, if his action is justified under the general licence they will of course tell him to carry on.
Encouraging people to do things that may be questionable or inhabit legal grey areas (no matter how minor) is ultimately not going to do anyone who shoots any favours. Do it right and do it legal.

Not sure why you would need a faceshield unless you're throwing the stuff around . Protective gloves are the most important requirement with regards to safety from the rodenticide (and from diseases that the wee blighters might leave on things) . Some form of coverall and wellies are perhaps desirable and good practice but not strictly necessary, and a facemask (like one of those 'paper' filter ones) might be good practice if using a loose bait with powder on it in some limited circumstance but for most situations just not necessary. As far as I know gloves are the only PPE that is stipulated on the label of the rodenticides I've seen.
When I did an equivalent course I'm fairly sure we didn't need to use any equipment that we brought with us as we didn't do any live baiting. If you have wellies, coveralls, rubber gloves and a face mask I'd reckon you'll be ready for anything.

<I>As you will be checking the trap daily just clean it daily,or is it the mindset now that spending brass on useless technology is the sign of modern keepers and their training,buy what i cannot fathom.</I>
It's not useless at all, as he said the current open pots get very messy and he's looking for a solution. I find that the birds tend to frequently wash their food in the water, and depending on what they are fed with the water can get very mucky very quickly, especially unpleasant in warmer weather. Each individual bird varies but some are worse for doing it than others. Whether it bothers the birds or not is questionable and if you are able to check a trap twice or more a day it may be irrelevant as it will have the water frequently changed. Given that the birds can turn clean water to lumpy soup within an hour of being cleaned and fed the biggest potential problem this causes is for trappers who can't avoid having members of the public encounter their traps, filthy water looks bad and might result in a complaint or accusation, using rabbit water bottles seems perfectly sensible both for bird welfare and for public relations. The water bottles should last for years, doesn't seem like much of an expense to ensure a good clean water supply to the bird. Filthy traps with dirty water just perpetuate the accusations of anti-trappers, you could try being a bit more positive towards someone who is considering trying to avoid that rather than grumbling about penny pinching and 'modern keepers'.

"WCS will not ship these to the UK. It must be something to do with the deal with Magnum trap co. To order these for the Uk then they must be bought from other stores instead"
Both the WCS Tube trap and the WCS collarum UK models are slightly different than those available in the US and Canada?
Only the UK models are approved for use here:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/13/pdfs/uksi_20120013_en.pdf
"WCS Collarum Stainless UK Fox Model manufactured by or under the authority of Wildlife Control Supplies"
and:
"WCS Tube Trap International manufactured by or under the authority of Wildlife Control Supplies..../....The trap must be set within the artificial tunnel provided by the manufacturer for use in the UK"
Magnum traps offer an explanation:
http://www.magnumtrap.com/wcs-collarum.php
"The English approved version features a Relaxalock cable and adjustable stop to ensure a 'friendly' capture and comply with UK legislation. The WCS Collarum has been added to the list of approved spring traps for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland"
http://www.magnumtrap.com/tube-trap.php "The English approved version has a considerably more powerful spring than it's American counterpart and is additionally fitted with two 'killing bars' inside the tube.The target is therefore struck against these bars instead of being simply crushed against the side of the tunnel. It also has a safety catch. The standard USA version of this trap is not approved for use in the UK. It is illegal to use it here. Please only use approved traps. Do not accept illegal, often underpowered, copies or versions."
Importing US/Canadian would seem somewhat pointless unless someone intends to break the law by using them.

Cheers, found it....
http://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/uk146000.pdf
Variation of the Spring Traps Approval (England) Order 2012
2. The Schedule to the Spring Traps Approval (England) Order 2012(c) is varied as follows—
(a) in the entry for the BMI Magnum 55, in Column 2 (conditions), after “killing” insert
“grey squirrels,”;
must have missed that when I was reading the bit about the Goodnature being approved.

Out of interest, where on the Spring Traps Approval order is the approval for their use on squirrels?
As far as I can see (STAO 2012) it's approved for use against Rats, Mice and 'other small ground vermin', the latter group does not include grey squirrel, hence why other traps specifically mention grey squirrel specifically e.g. the BMI 110 which can be used for "grey squirrels, stoats, weasels, rats, mice and other small ground vermin".
Has there been a modification to the STAO to permit the 55's use on grey squirrel?